Peter's analysis is wishful thinking at best

With respect I must disgree with Pro-Israeli Democrat. If indeed he is of the Democrat Party in the United states he would be familiar with another phenomena afflicting the west. This is the tendency amongst the media and academia to identify any degree of nationalism with Nazism even if it is nationalism that historically played a role in the downfall of nazism. Whilst this occurs to a lesser extent in Australia and America the attitude is rife through Europe. One can readily theorise as to the origins of this particularly diseased diaspora of thought. In Australia and the U.S. ground zero is the Vietnam War. In Europe it is the aftermath of Facism.

As Mark Steyn has observed, almost all of the institutions in Europe and the manner in which Political Institutions have been organised is around resisting popularism and thereby facism of any sort. Europeans exist in a society that through its media, laws and education system denies its citizenry the ability to organise in the same manner as they did before the Second World War. One could mistakenly characterise these shackles on the arms of indigenous Europeans as ephemeral - chains of air - after all do we not break the law every day? Are there not alternate forms of media (i.e. the internet)? In reality restraints imposed by ideas are amongst the most powerful in existence. Observe the problems we now face caused by the ideas generated from a few transcribed passages of the life and teachings of a schizophrenic camel herder that has inspired this invasion of Europe and innumerable wars around the world. And may yet enslave us all.

Besides - Facism was driven by large clusters of unemployed/unemployable youth produced by adverse economic conditions. Employment amongst european youth remains respectively high where amongst Islamic youth it remains abysmally low. The only people therefore with the capacity to launch facist revolution are the Islamites and they have been successfully doing so for the last twenty odd years. As Australia's pro rape Sheik Taj Al Hilali pointed out "One must not dismiss the possibility of Islamic revolution within western socieites within the next few years".

Fat and happy, the europeans are only too willing to surrender large areas of their sovereign territory and legal privileges just to maintain their consumer lifestyle. They'll even tolerate the persistant brutalisation and rape of their youth and the odd mass property destroying riot like the ones in France. More evil is seen in identifying the perpetrators as muslims and their cassus belli as Islam itself than in the perpetrator's actions. Let's not rock the boat in our enlightened multi culti society.

The most common reaction to Europes burgeoning Islamisation is acquiescence. Deprived of pride in any collective identity europeans either sink into dhimmitude with a sigh or flee overseas. In the Netherlands it is the latter which appears to be occurring with an exodus of around 30,000 professional people per year. A recent refugee from eastern France answered my question of: "How is it over there?' Almost immediately with: "There are a lot of Muslims.'"

Any form of political or military solution to the presence of large numbers of hostile foreigners within our ancestral homelands on the European continent requires leaders. Leaders for some reason or other are seen as dangerous for much the same reason nationalism is equated with Nazism. Pim Fortuyn's assassin cited his growing power and profile as the reason for his actions. There are many likeminded people in the media and higher education sector who might not resort to direct assassination but are not adverse to character assassination. Instead of leaders we have managers in the west. Iraq for example and Afghanistan can be seen as merely extreme attempts to manage radical Islam. Democratic rules and laws prohibit effectively curtailing islamisation on our soil. Thus our soldiers fight against an ideology that begins to rule their homeland whilst they are away.

Leaders propose comprehensive strategies for dealing with problems in overarching contexts that are consistent at home and abroad. Managers merely take one problem at a time independently of any grander scheme and deal with the least difficult problems first.

Read into european history what you will and try and project a positive outcome for indigenous Europeans at least but I think the managers of europe officially missed the memo on Islamicisation. As a Christian who quite cynically viewed the Book of revelations (what was that St John smoking when he saw all this crap? I used to say to myself) I see the emergence of a new Roman Empire. We forget that operationally to the early heavily persecuted Christians Rome was seen as an anti Christian political colossus. This new Roman empire will be a trans mediterranean Anti Christian entity first governed by Socialists and Islamists evenly then when the former have been out manoevred or outbred Islamists will govern alone. If you need a novelisation of what Islamist Europe will look like, Ianus recently directed me to The Hatred of Angels at http://www.6thcolumnagainstjihad.com/HatredOfTheAngels_P1.htm

Homefront.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Name:

Email Address: (optional)

Title of Comments:

Comments:

Mark my comment as a response to Peter's analysis is wishful thinking at best by Homefront

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".